May 30, 2009

Culture Shock For California

The Associated Press reports on California. “Nowhere in the country has the bust arrived more abruptly. Santa Clara County, home to Silicon Valley, saw bankruptcies soar 59 percent in the past 12 months, and projections are that they’re still climbing. Almost every seat in the bankruptcy courtroom is full. Joel Gonzalez, who used to make $100,000 a year installing hardwood floors, earned ‘about 400 bucks’ in March doing odd jobs. His life began falling apart in the fall when his boss, distraught about his failing business, committed suicide. Suddenly out of work, Gonzalez saw the adjustable payments on his $360,000 home loan increase from $2,400 to $3,200. Two months later his savings ran out and he found himself talking to a bankruptcy attorney.”

“‘This is culture shock for me,’ he said, tugging at his dress shirt outside the federal courthouse. ‘But after my boss’ death, I’m trying to keep it in perspective. I have a money problem, and I’ll get through it.’”

“Foreclosures have kept pace with bankruptcy filings in this region, but they’re far less obvious. In a new townhouse complex just a few miles from Intel Corp.’s Santa Clara headquarters, close to 10 percent of the units are on the market as foreclosure sales. But wander down the dreamy streets — Inspiration Place, Meditation Place, Fascination Place — and you would never know. ‘They don’t hang out signs because they want to be discreet,’ says Robert Lei, who holds a master’s degree in semiconductor device physics but now works as a specialist in foreclosure sales. ‘They don’t want so many people to see so many ‘for sale’ signs and get scared away, like there’s something wrong here.’”

“Resident Jeff Nelson, 27, a firefighter, said he and his wife, a teacher, would like to move their growing family into one of many low priced single family homes now on the market, but they’re stuck in this complex, he said. The numbers just don’t add up: They bought their unit three years ago for $527,000, they owe $500,000 and his foreclosed neighbors are selling their places for less than $450,000.”

“‘We thought owning our own place would get us somewhere,’ he said. ‘But now we’ve got to stay. It’s either stay, foreclose, or short sell.’”

The Record Searchlight. “The herky-jerky nature of Shasta County’s housing market continued in April. DataQuick Information Systems reported that 131 new and used homes were sold last month, an 8.4 percent dip from March and 20 percent drop from April 2008. It was the lowest April for sales in the 15 years DataQuick has tracked Shasta County. Last month’s lag in sales happened as the median price shot up 18.6 percent from March to $210,000.”

“‘A lot of times when you see prices whipsaw back and forth, some experts say that is a sign that the market is near bottom,’ Bill Parsons of Parsons Realty in Redding said.”

“April saw an uptick in pending sales, a trend that continued into mid-May, said Brad Garbutt of Real Estate Professionals GMAC in Redding. But with lending requirements still tight, it’s not uncommon for deals to fall apart, or for escrows drag on. ‘I see anywhere from four to five deals fall out of escrow a day. I think most of the reason is buyers are not able to get the loan approved,’ Garbutt said.”

The Sacramento Bee. “The California Public Employees’ Retirement System would lose its entire $922 million investment in a Southern California land deal under a plan that could be approved by a bankruptcy court judge Monday. The ruling would wrap up one of the pension fund’s worst real estate ventures. CalPERS’ housing portfolio, once estimated to be worth $9 billion, was reported to be $6 billion last fall.”

“CalPERS bought a majority stake in the 20,000-home Newhall Ranch project in January 2007, hoping for long-term returns on a major undeveloped tract in Los Angeles County. But the project’s developer, LandSource Communities Development LLC, faltered as the real estate market crumbled. It filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in June.”

“CalPERS considered buying back into the project through the bankruptcy process. The new stake would have been no greater than $55 million, court records showed. That deal is now off, CalPERS spokeswoman Pat Macht said Friday. ‘We conducted a thorough review of the proposal and decided not to participate because it doesn’t fit well with the strategic direction we’re taking in real estate,’ she said.”

From Maktoob Business. “Emaar Properties lost a bid to buy its way out of trouble with its failed U.S. home-building business and is in talks with creditors aimed at heading off liquidation of WL Homes, news agency Dow Jones reported on Friday. Dow Jones said Judge Brendan Shannon acceded to creditor demands that he convert WL Homes’ Chapter 11 bankruptcy case into one under Chapter 7, but he held up implementation of the order while the company and creditors try to work out their differences.”

“Conversion would put WL Homes, which operates under John Laing Homes, in the hands of a trustee, who would try to get a better price for the operation than Emaar was offering. It would mean the proposed Chapter 11 auction of the company that was once one of the largest private home builders in the U.S. is off, and the bankruptcy financing Emaar was offering is no longer needed.”

“Shannon did not fault Emaar or WL Homes over the auction proposal but said the ‘exceedingly difficult circumstances’ of WL Homes case, where big money was riding on the housing bubble, produced bad Chapter 11 case economics. Bank lenders were owed more than $350 million when WL Homes filed for bankruptcy in February. The company estimates it is worth $7 million in a liquidation.”

“Conversion to the shoestring liquidation form of bankruptcy will make little practical difference to the fate of WL Homes, the judge noted. ‘We are looking at something that is functionally the same whether it’s under Chapter 7 or under Chapter 11, we’re looking at a sale,’ Shannon said. ‘Nobody’s talking about reorganising or restructuring or rebuilding this business.’”

The Tribune. “Executives of a Ventura real estate development company that was once one of the largest homebuilders in San Luis Obispo County have failed to appear for several hearings scheduled in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Santa Barbara, the Ventura County Star has reported. Creditors of R.W. Hertel & Sons forced the developer into an involuntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy in January.”

“Creditors can petition for an involuntary bankruptcy in order to force the liquidation of a debtor’s assets to pay their obligations. ‘This was an involuntary case, and in those cases it’s hard to get debtors to cooperate,’ Sandra K. McBeth, a trustee assigned by the court to oversee the company’s assets, told the Star.”

The Recordnet. “California home builders got busy in April, with sales bolstered by a $10,000 state income tax credit, and took out 2,265 permits for single-family homes, a jump of 21 percent from March. The impact was bigger in San Joaquin County, where the 77 single-family permits issued in April was well more than twice the 34 permits builders obtained in March.”

“Florsheim Homes had eight homes for sale when the tax program began in March, and they all sold within three weeks. Now the company is back to building homes on order as well as a few speculative homes, betting there will be interested buyers when they are done. ‘You need to have some homes available for a quick close in this market, but very few,’ said Joe Anfuso, president of Florsheim Homes in Stockton.”

“That caution is justified as state officials report the popular tax credit program - limited to $100 million or the first 10,000 qualified applicants - is nearly fully subscribed. Not surprisingly, industry officials are lobbying to see the tax credit program extended. Given the multibillion-dollar state budget deficit, it’s going to be a tough sell, admitted Tim Coyle, senior vice president of the California Building Industry Association.”

“But, he contended, in the long run, the credit would boost state tax revenues as it encourages economic activity. Coyle noted a recent study found that building and selling a new home generates as much as $16,000 in revenues to the state. If you’re handing out a $10,000 tax credit and getting back $16,000, that’s a pretty good deal, he said. ‘Economic activity - that is what this effort is all about; jobs, creating jobs.’”

“John Beckman, executive officer of the Building Industry Association of the Delta, agreed. ‘The tax credit has worked,’ he said. ‘We need to continue this to help the construction industry to recover and bring the whole economy back up with it.’”

The San Gabriel Valley News. “Los Angeles County eked out its second median home price gain in April after more than a year and a half of declines, the California Association of Realtors reported Thursday. The county’s median price for an existing, single-family detached home rose 1.9 percent to $300,690 in April. But that was still 31 percent below the year-ago price of $435,980.”

“Chris Vigil, a broker/associate in Whittier, said the Southland housing market is picking up steam. ‘The consensus among agents in my office is that this feels like a sellers’ market,’ he said. ‘Every house is getting multiple offers. You’re often competing with up to 10 offers on a house.’”

“Bill Velto, a broker/manager for Tarbell Realtors in Upland, said scores of potential buyers are lined up to buy bank-owned properties. In Fontana, for example, foreclosures and short sales account for about 80 percent of the transactions his office handles. ‘We’re getting 10 to 15 offers on every property,’ he said. ‘I think the banks are being wise by not dumping a lot of these on the market because that would hurt them by driving down prices on other properties.’”

“The median home price in most San Gabriel Valley cities is far below what it was a year ago. Altadena showed the biggest year-over-year decline - a 42.2 percent drop down to $350,000, followed by Baldwin Park, which saw its median price fall 41.7 percent to $210,000.”

“San Bernardino County weathered even more severe extremes. The city of San Bernardino saw its median price fall 61.6 percent to $73,000, while Highland posted a 63.1 percent drop, bringing its median price to $120,000. ‘I don’t think we’ll be out of this recession anytime soon,’ Vigil said. ‘There are a lot more loans that will be adjusting over the next year.’”

The Burbank Leader. “Struggling homeowners sat alongside cash-strapped home shoppers and other attendees during a set of workshops Saturday aimed at helping residents through their financial crises. The workshops were organized by Assemblyman Paul Krekorian and aimed at residents within the 43rd Assembly District.”

“Severe losses led Burbank resident Calvin Jung to the event. Jung was forced to close his chiropractic and massage center in downtown Los Angeles after business had slowed to a halt during the recession. He lost close to $90,000 over two years, he said.”

“He said he hoped to get help modifying his home loan, which he wasn’t currently having trouble paying but was expecting to. ‘It’s going to get tough because my business is gone, I don’t have a job, and the [stock] market took 90% of my money in September,’ Jung said.”

The North County Times. “As you drive down Cottonwood Canyon Road, the subdivisions appear to represent one of Southern California’s premier communities: palm trees, emerald grass and 8-foot-high walls adorned with meticulously maintained shrubbery. And then the road ends. From perfectly paved to bumpy dirt.”

“This is Lake Elsinore. It has been afflicted by foreclosures more than any other community in the region. Banks have seized 1 out of every 5 houses since January 2007, according to data from ForeclosureRadar and the Riverside County assessor’s office.”

“And more foreclosures could be poised to enter the pipeline, according to a report by First American CoreLogic. It showed that in one of Lake Elsinore’s ZIP codes, 92532, 3 out of every 4 mortgages were ‘under water.’”

“The area has blazed the city’s trail to becoming the region’s foreclosure capital, the result of an explosion in construction of new homes that were sold to borrowers who could not afford the payments. From 2000 to 2008, the number of households in 92532 tripled from 1,420 to 4,648, according to census and county data.”

“Construction in the master-planned communities along Cottonwood Canyon has come to a halt as builders struggle to compete with banks selling foreclosures for half the peak price set in 2005. That has left bare foundations with protruding pipes next to brand-new homes. Portable toilets next to half-million-dollar homes.”

“It doesn’t bother Roy Meerkamper, who purchased a home a year ago in the quasi-finished development —- the empty lots offer plenty of exercise space for his three golden retrievers. ‘I just try to not look at the housing prices,’ he said.”

“Down the road, bank seizures have ripped through an area known as Tuscany Hills. In that subdivision, Dan Baldwin tired of seeing brown lawns take over. It wasn’t going to happen on his corner. After two homeowners were evicted, Baldwin grabbed his hose, borrowed a neighbor’s so that it extended down the block, and he watered the lawns.”

“‘We’ve seen a lot of yards go bad and trees go down,’ said Nancy Baldwin, Dan’s wife. ‘We figured if someone comes in, they’re more likely to buy with a healthy yard.’”

“And Lake Elsinore’s housing crisis could deepen if things don’t change for borrowers such as Sean Malebranche. He purchased a Tuscany Hills home in 2000. Malebranche said he has lost hours at his job as a longshoreman in Long Beach. ‘It’s extremely stressful,’ he said. ‘You work all your life to have something, and then to see it go down the drain —- it’s been difficult.’”

The Inland Newspapers. “It seems that real-estate busts don’t phase Doug Duncan. Fannie Mae’s vice president and chief economist spoke at the Real Estate Research Council of Southern California’s quarterly luncheon on Thursday at Cal Poly Pomona, giving a humorous yet serious view of the local and national housing markets.”

“‘There’s a presumption today that this is all new, but it’s not,’ Duncan said about the reeling housing market coupled with a battered economy. ‘This has happened cyclically time and time again.’”

“‘And we tend to think there’s a silver bullet that’s going to fix it all, but that’s not the case,’ he said, referring to state and federal initiatives to keep troubled homeowners from going into foreclosure. Duncan said he’s skeptical the government can ‘retool’ the financial system to eliminate the financial risk collectively taken by Wall Street and borrowers during the housing boom.”

“Even during the housing boom years, when credit was so free that rising economic growth projections sounded more logical than fairy tale, the state was running an unsustainable budget, he said.”

“Skyrocketing real-estate values were being used as a basis to predict future growth. Since those projections took a nose dive, California is still running at ‘unsustainable levels,’ as Duncan puts it. ‘We probably have further to go than we think,’ he said about California’s economy and real-estate markets. ‘Many losses have already been taken but not all of them. We’re not out of the woods yet.’”

“Because of a wave of adjustable mortgages lent to borrowers immediately before and after the housing bubble’s peak, 250,000 more households in California will see their monthly payments rise, most of them between now and 2014, Duncan said. This isn’t the only problem. The Mortgage Bankers Association said on Thursday that prime fixed-rate mortgages, which have been the conventional loans historically used for decades, ‘now represent the largest share of new foreclosures.’”

“It’ll be a bear for the state’s economy to withstand. ‘Is the pace of economic decline slowing? Probably,’ Duncan said. ‘But I don’t see anything close to economic growth any time soon.’”




RSS feed | Trackback URI

106 Comments »

Comment by Ben Jones
2009-05-30 11:19:26

‘‘There’s a presumption today that this is all new, but it’s not,’ Duncan said about the reeling housing market coupled with a battered economy. ‘This has happened cyclically time and time again.’

There has never been a financial mania like this one in history, bub, and the failure to recognize this is why we have FBs like this guy:

‘Roy Meerkamper…purchased a home a year ago in the quasi-finished development —- the empty lots offer plenty of exercise space for his three golden retrievers. ‘I just try to not look at the housing prices,’ he said.’

A year ago. This guy looks more like toast than a crouton.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-05-30 11:30:13

Hi Ben:

I guess the $1 question is were we just hit by a Nor’easter, or are we in the eye of a cat 5 hurricane waiting for the back end?

Comment by Ben Jones
2009-05-30 11:45:29

Sometimes the answer is right there for anyone to see:

‘Because of a wave of adjustable mortgages lent to borrowers immediately before and after the housing bubble’s peak, 250,000 more households in California will see their monthly payments rise, most of them between now and 2014, Duncan said. This isn’t the only problem. The Mortgage Bankers Association said on Thursday that prime fixed-rate mortgages, which have been the conventional loans historically used for decades, ‘now represent the largest share of new foreclosures.’

Comment by James
2009-05-30 11:51:42

I’m thinking my original call for the “bottom” in 2010-11 time frame might have been a tad optimistic.

Think the call for the bottom to end in 2022-23 might be about right. Maybe.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by az_lender
2009-05-30 15:27:56

The Ivy Zellman ARM reset chart (google it) would convince you immediately that 2010-11 is too soon. However, it would also lead you to believe that a bottom in 2012-13 is possible…but if most FC’s are now coming from prime fixed-rate loans being in default, I think your guess (2022-23) is as good as anyone’s.

 
 
Comment by SMF
2009-05-30 11:52:45

Or here:

“From 2000 to 2008, the number of households in 92532 tripled from 1,420 to 4,648, according to census and county data.”

How a town can triple in size in 8 years is beyond me. Just shows how absolutely crazy speculation was.

And the worse part, there are just as many speculators buying those ‘cheap’ homes as before!!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Ben Jones
2009-05-30 12:19:57

‘there are just as many speculators buying those ‘cheap’ homes as before’

I’m a bit conflicted by this fact. On the one hand, this is who should be buying foreclosures. It’s a gamble and gamblers can afford to take risks and lose. On the other, it is a sign that speculation hasn’t been wrung out of the market. And speculation has proven to be a weakness during this bubble, as these people will walk the moment they see no profit to be had.

The ideal scenario, IMO, would be for prices to continue to decline rapidly and ‘end-users’ to become the market. There are a lot of factors working to delay this. And throw in the pick-up in building, more loan resets, freshly minted FBs, etc. Making a bad situation worse is what our system is excels at, I suppose.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 13:45:52

“It’s a gamble and gamblers can afford to take risks and lose. On the other, it is a sign that speculation hasn’t been wrung out of the market.”

I’d go one further here. All the housing reflation sabre rattling coming out of DC has given specuvestors encouragement that housing inflation will soon kick back into overdrive, even though knives are currently dropping at the fastest rate on record.

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 13:55:05

Ben –

As you are well aware, should this effort underway to use financially engineered housing price inflation to restart the REIC bull cycle prove successful, the next likely wave will be further overbuilding to add to the record number of vacant homes already dotting the U.S. landscape. This could turn out to be a mirror image of the twenty-year decline in Japanese real estate if the falling knife is artificially reversed in mid flight.

 
Comment by Ben Jones
2009-05-30 14:23:47

I have my doubts that a bull cycle can be engineered mid-parabolic bubble decline. But there isn’t any question that people are buying houses at the wrong time, partly due to government efforts. My question is, will the media then pick up on this fact and put a spotlight on the wrongheaded measures? After all, it is a serious question; would there have been a housing bubble in the US had the GSEs not existed? If there weren’t tax deductions for buying houses? If we didn’t pressure lenders to make loans to people who shouldn’t be taking on them on?

Your question about a repeat of the Japanese experience is also relevant and I’ve seen it mentioned on Bloomberg, etc. But sadly, the state of public financial awareness (in part due to poor financial media coverage) is such that I suspect that this country won’t realize we have made this mistake until we are 10 years down Japans path. I guess this is all one reason why I still keep this blog going.

 
Comment by dude
2009-05-30 17:29:10

I guess this is all one reason why I still keep this blog going.

That and the fact this is the best blog, bar none, on the planet?

 
Comment by adge
2009-05-30 22:19:23

Hate to break it to you Ben but the media is not going to put a spotlight on the wrongheaded measures.

The media profits from consumption fueled by high housing prices. The more consumption, the more advertising, the more profit.

Also, most of the media you receive is controlled by a few major media companies with longstanding relationship with government. For example your TV dial is controlled by five companies:

Disney (ABC, Family, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNClassic, Disney)
GE (NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, A&E, History, Telemundo)
Nat. Amuse. (CBS, Showtime, MTV, MTV2, CW, CMT, Spike)
News Corporation (Fox, Fox News, Fox Sports, Speed)
Time Warner (CNN, Headline News, tru, Cartoon, TBS, HBO)

 
 
Comment by aNYCdj
2009-05-30 11:59:08

True But John Mauldin thinks we will muddle through very low growth and not have a second crash. But with all the money being tossed at this..who knows.

And what if interest rates remain very low and ARM’s adjust downward? Will people still walk away if they can still afford the new lower payment?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by socal lender
2009-05-30 19:30:17

A lot of these ARM’s are “pick a payment” or interest only until the reset, so while the rate may be lower, the payment on many loans will still increase after the reset. You now have a loan amortized over 20-27 yrs depending on the interest only time frame. Some may just be ARM’s where they are making a fully amortized payment, but I suspect those are few and far between. The name of the game in bubble time was: borrow as much money as I can while making the smallest payment possible, worry about repayment later.

 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 13:51:58

The answer may depend upon whether one’s real estate investments are in Boston or in Coral Gables.

 
 
Comment by 2banana
2009-05-30 14:27:12

Anything for the squirrels? Have we all forgotten about the squirrels already?.

Comment by dude
2009-05-30 17:30:41

Grill ‘em.

 
 
Comment by pismoclam
2009-05-30 21:04:36

Check the ‘80 to ‘84 cycle with 20% interest rates. Obama will be the new Jimmy Carter with double digit interest rates. You aint seen nothin’ yet.

 
 
Comment by NotQuiteInChapelHill
2009-05-30 11:43:25

“Joel Gonzalez, who used to make $100,000 a year installing hardwood floors”

Seriously? WTF is wrong in California that every blue-collar worker breaks six figures?

Comment by scdave
2009-05-30 11:57:23

WTF is wrong in California that every blue-collar worker breaks six figures ??

This was just as big a problem in helping inflate the bubble as anything else around here…
$100,000 for a hardwood floor installer was nothing during this period…I have a steel Fabricator friend that made over $500,000. one year…I have another friend thats a Realtor that sells SFR’s that made over $700,000. one year…Another made over 1 mil on a 2.5 mil spec.
house in Los Gatos…Plumbers, Electricians, General contractors “ALL” were on board the gravy train…The motto of the day was “Just Getter Done Now” I don’t care what it cost because some “smuck” is going to pay me a fricken fortune for this place…

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 13:50:42

“WTF is wrong in California that every blue-collar worker breaks six figures ??”

Where do you get your data? Mine came from the U.S. Census Bureau:

Median household income definition and source info
Median household income, 2007
San Diego = $61,724
California = $59,928

Comment by dude
2009-05-30 17:35:30

Either they are exaggerating income or lying on tax returns. I’d say it is a bit of both.

Construction work has always been feast or famine. There are far too few of these schmucks who saved for the inevitable rainy day.

If I based my home purchase on my most recent tax return I should be looking for something in the million dollar range. I am smart enough to know that last year’s earnings are probably a fluke due to the bubble. J6P probably is not that smart.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-30 18:30:43

““WTF is wrong in California that every blue-collar worker breaks six figures ??”

“Where do you get your data? Mine came from the U.S. Census Bureau:”

Isn’t it possible, if not likely, that some in the construction industry were making astounding incomes around 2005 just as some in the tech industry were making astounding incomes in the late 90’s? Both boosted state income tax revenues, but didn’t impact median incomes much.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Little Al
2009-05-30 12:03:58

They were making it hand over fist a few years back. I saw a swimming pool contractor in Monrovia. I had no respect for the huckster, living in a 3 million dollar home. On the fourth of July, you could watch 7 fireworks shows going off simultaneously from his swimming pool. I wonder how he’s doing now with nothing being built?

Comment by CA renter
2009-05-31 04:08:31

Builders/developers are notoriously ostentatious. Some of the biggest homes/estates are owned by people in the RE business.

 
 
Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-05-30 12:26:04

speaking of hardwood floors, I was talking about a water leak issue where I rent with a bank employee today. He says his girlfriend was renting a townhouse third floor here in Los Angeles and woke up with about 8 inches of water surrounding her bed - on the third floor!

The hardwood flooring is severely damaged. There’s bubbling and warps and such.

It turns out, the woman who owns that unit used some unlicensed handyman to work the plumbing. The handyman did not seal things up correctly.

The water damaged the second floor and first floor units too.

The girl rented there only a couple of weeks. The HOA blamed the landlady, not the girl.

The bank employee told me that by saving $200 for an unlicensed handyman the owner now is probably going to have to pay tens of thousands of dollars in repairs. And she did not have insurance!!!

In my case, I was awakened at 11:00 pm by a knock on my door. Maintenance wanted to look at my bathroom for leaks. Water damage in an apartment below but to the north. I thought it was odd, since the unit directly below mine did not get damaged. They at first dismissed the unit on my floor just to the north because the guy did not run any water last night. I took a shower, so they figured it was me. It turned out the leak was from the pipes under my neighbor’s apartment directly north of me.

I think the 4.7 earthquake a couple weeks ago must have jarred some pipes loose. Must have been shoddy work to begin with.

 
Comment by Groundhogday
2009-05-30 15:14:41

Not just California. Here in Eastern WA, I received a quote from a two-man business to hang dry wall back in 2007. I asked them to break out the materials vs. labor, and estimate how long the job would take. I then worked out that working full time these guys were making $150k/year each. Two guys with nothing more than a high school education, hanging drywall. And to be honest, it was clear that they didn’t really care all that much about getting the job… they were all booked up for the year regardless.

Comment by rms
2009-05-30 19:55:20

These grunts spend it faster than it comes in too; no shortage of expensive toyz with payments.

 
 
 
Comment by crash1
2009-05-30 12:22:57

Coyle noted a recent study found that building and selling a new home generates as much as $16,000 in revenues to the state. If you’re handing out a $10,000 tax credit and getting back $16,000, that’s a pretty good deal, he said.

No comment necessary.

Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-30 18:41:45

“Coyle noted a recent study found that building and selling a new home generates as much as $16,000 in revenues to the state. If you’re handing out a $10,000 tax credit and getting back $16,000, that’s a pretty good deal, he said.”

It’s mostly a $10k subsidy for the builder. If the builder lowered the price by $10k, the state would still get nearly $16k in revenue versus $6k. The buyer overpays by $10k and pays tax on that extra $100 in property taxes every year. Conveniently there’s no mention of the costs associated with unnecessary empty houses that sit vacant and decay.

 
 
Comment by WT Economist
2009-05-30 12:24:45

Here on the other coast in Brooklyn, we’re just starting the descent. Note the Windsor Terrace rowhouse in this post.

http://www.brownstoner.com/brownstoner/archives/2009/05/open_house_pick_272.php

It’s identical to mine and a block over, same builder, same era (1910 to 1920), same design. About 1,500 sf plus an 850 sf basement, 17 feet wide, park on the street, a small rear patio. Mine has an open front porch. Nice house, nice neigborhood, traditionally middle class.

A bunch of these sold for exactly $999,999 at the peak of the mania.

This house was listed for that, cut to $923K, and then sold by a very sane seller for $840K in March. That’s 16% down from the peak, so far — more in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Real worth? My guess is $600K.

Comment by Ben Jones
2009-05-30 12:28:18

I don’t know. IMO, $600k is a lot of money.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 13:42:07

“It’s identical to mine…”

Estimation bias inducer…

 
 
Comment by whyoung
2009-05-30 14:09:09

And i’ll bet some that officially sold for $999,999 actually went for more.

Friend bought a house in Williamsburg in 2006 and and the realtor advised that number as an “official” sale price and a seperate payment for ‘furnishings’ for the amount over that.

Anything a million or more has to pay a “mansion tax” in NYC…

luckily he bought a cheaper house through another realtor.

Apparently a this kind of thing was SOP for a lot of people in the period…

 
Comment by az_lender
2009-05-30 15:33:13

I guess “real worth” is a moving target, now that rents are also falling. We have often said “real worth” might be 125x monthly rent, or something like that. So, would that place rent out for $4800 a month? And is it likely that such a rent would still be appropriate next year?

[yeah yeah, I know, the "125" depends on interest rates and other stuff; it's just a convenient number]

 
Comment by Leighsong
2009-05-30 22:33:08

i enjoy your post brother.

Dang - 600k is many $$$.

Makes me sick - here on HBB -

That IS norm for the area.

Please tell me you resist the siren song.

Best Always,

Leigh

Comment by WT Economist
2009-05-31 04:57:25

People tell me I’m nuts when I say housing prices will go down 40 to 50%. They say NYC prices will remain high. My response is that it’s a long way down to high.

$500 to $600K is a lot of money, I agree.

Comment by Awaiting Bubble Rubble
2009-05-31 19:37:12

NYC is one place where a fair number of people actually do make six figures. In CA in the Bay Area, a fair percentage do as well, but they talk about it much more. I can see $600K for NYC and $500K for San Francisco and some of the nicer parts of the peninsula, but not the rest of California, where the average income is closer to $60K.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by DC to VA and Waiting
2009-05-30 12:56:19

It’s amazing to me how many people had no contingency planning for things possible going wrong. It seems they just all assumed that things will be fine and they’ll never get sick, possible lose a job, etc.

I posted last year that my girlfriend wanted us to buy a house in Arlington b/c it was on the market for a price we could both afford. The both of us are contractors making approximately $260K. Anyhow, she was on a contract that she expected would be renewed for another two years, which turned out to be wrong and was renewed for six months to wrap up some additional work. It turns out the new head of the Dept is assessing projects and this does not fit their future plans. Now she has approximately 4 months to get on another contract, and I just left my job to start working with the Fed for a guy who is retiring. So in the next year we could go from $260k to $190K or $110K, depending on circumstances. Just thought I’d share…

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-05-30 14:04:52

You RICH people have it so easy with all that money

You can spend whatever you like..and not worry….

I could live quite well on 1/2 of that $110K ….

Comment by rms
2009-05-30 19:58:40

“I could live quite well on 1/2 of that $110K…”

You must have an understanding wife.

 
 
Comment by SV_renter
2009-05-30 14:08:00

What fields are you all in that you are making so much?

Comment by Silverback1011
2009-05-30 14:30:21

Sounds like what happened to my daughter’s former Indian fiance’ @ Fannie Mae. He went from making about $ 260K per year as a visa’d contractor ( makes ya sick, doesn’t it - all of that $$ flowing out of the country ) to nuttin’ and had to go home to Mumbai. He didn’t buy a house while he was here though - just rented.

 
Comment by oxide
2009-05-30 16:51:48

If I had to take a wild guess, I’d say government defense contracting? Possible contractions with new Admin?

With that kind of income, you shouldn’t be buying ANYthing. You should be livin’ frugal and packing it away tight.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-05-30 18:34:41

Yep. Contractor here. You can guess which field ;)

At huge incomes like that, you have to be realistic like “DC to VA and Waiting” and assume the gold vein will be near its end of exploitation.

Hopefully they did NOT buy that townhome. Going down to $110k is fine still. You can rent together and still have money left over to buy, say, T-bills and gold bullion.

Contract engineering Income varies because sometimes you get a lot of overtime. Some regions of the country are hot while others have dried up and hourly rates are lower. If you are willing to relocate within a week, you can get a very good paying gig.

When you do this for thirteen years (living well below your means) and have a diverse asset allocation plan where you periodically rebalance, you will build up a recession proof portfolio and be able to radically change your lifestyle.

I like that thread in Bits Bucket where someone (I forget who) suggested that another blogger has the ability to relocate to four different areas per year to follow the good weather.

I’m not there yet (by far). I figure I need a $5 million net worth first. I would stay within California since it has all the climates of the U.S. in one state. Could be in my home town of Fresno from March to May, in the high sierra from June to the end of August, in Big Sur from September to November, then in Palm Springs from December through the end of February! Ah, to dream!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Sailor
2009-06-01 01:51:13

I work on an annual contract myelf. It can get stressfull every year waiting for news of wether the contract is getting renewed or not. I have been here since 2005 and laid off once for 3 months then rehired doing the same job. This fiscal year a new company underbid and got the contract. Fortunatly they kept 95% of us. After I started reading this blog in 2007 I budgeted to get off the debt bus. Unfortunatley I still have until Sept 2010 to be totaly debt free. But I am looking forward to the day I no longer have to worry about it anymore. Im very fortunate that my wife agree’s and we plan to never buy on credit ever again except for a home that we know will be much cheaper than they are now.

However that all depends on our jobs in California which are not guaranteed. Mine you now know is year to year and hers is in education which is even less secure in California now.

 
 
 
 
Comment by az_lender
2009-05-30 15:35:17

Well anyway, I hope you resisted the gf’s pressure to buy. (?)

 
Comment by Leighsong
2009-05-30 22:44:18

Dc to VA -

Thanks for sharing.

I cannot imagine your circumstances.

Best,

Leigh

 
 
Comment by Zombie Banks
2009-05-30 12:59:06

I just zillowed my cali rental…
384k
1792.00 mo payment
Save me from myself.

Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 14:10:42

Our rental’s Zestimate = $490,500. There is no reason short of all out certainty that hyperinflation (including of rents) was on the way that I would ever pay that much for our loverly rental, which our landlords bought for $565,000 back in 2004.

Here is the previous sale info (SDlookup dot com):

Date Price Held Return Annual
09/30/2004 $565,000 4y 1m 95% 17%
08/03/2000 $290,000 3m 0% 0%
04/28/2000 $290,000 n/a - -

As to my landlords’ return on investment, using the Zestimate gives me

(490,500/565,000-1)*100 = -13.2%, and Zestimates tend to typically exhibit upwards bias.

Comment by Zombie Banks
2009-05-30 15:48:27

My LL offered to sell it to me for 600k last year.
Now I am not a trouble maker but I wish I could get a lower rent on this place. I am praying you guys are correct and wait till 2013.

Comment by dude
2009-05-30 17:43:41

Faith not necessary here, there is plenty of objective evidence.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 13:38:15

New York Times
Political Memo
Deep Cuts Could Reshape California
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER
Published: May 30, 2009

LOS ANGELES — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger did not get the election results he sought. Now he seems determined to show California voters the consequences.

In a special election on May 19, voters rejected a batch of measures on increasing taxes, borrowing funds and reapportioning state money that were designed to close a multibillion-dollar budget gap. The cuts Mr. Schwarzenegger has proposed to make up the difference, if enacted by the Legislature, would turn California into a place that in some ways would be unrecognizable in modern America: poor children would have no health insurance, prisoners would be released by the thousands and state parks would be closed.

Nearly all of the billions of dollars in cuts the administration has proposed would affect programs for poor Californians, although prisons and schools would take hits, as well.

Government doesn’t provide services to rich people,” Mike Genest, the state’s finance director, said on a conference call with reporters on Friday. “It doesn’t even really provide services to the middle class.” He added: “You have to cut where the money is.”

Comment by 2banana
2009-05-30 14:32:36

Cut illegals from all state services
Cut state workers salaries and pensions by 50%
Investigate all welfare fraud, require work for state payments

Budget balanced.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-05-30 14:49:32

Hate to break it to ya banana:

But the fraud IS the Back to work program, All they do is babysit the welfare recipients and give them menial work to do, even if you are highly educated, while getting a nice salary Biggest waste of your tax money..

———————————-
Investigate all welfare fraud, require work for state payments

 
Comment by az_lender
2009-05-30 15:38:27

Can’t cut illegals from state services: the Supreme Court said immigration policy is not “state” business. So, what you do it, just cut the damn services. Period. Which might even deter the immigration.

Comment by az_lender
2009-05-30 15:43:56

“what you do it” = “what you do is”
(I got excited)

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by CA renter
2009-05-31 04:16:14

Send a bill to the federal govt for the illegal immigrants’ costs. There, fixed the state budget for ya! :)

 
 
 
Comment by Kevin
2009-05-31 16:26:55

Illegals don’t get state services.

Welfare? It goes to the caretakers of children (who are citizens).

Education? Again, the children are citizens.

What you’re suggesting is taking away benefits for citizens. Good luck getting that one through.

The only way you’re going to see any change is to get a constitutional amendment passed that changes the way that citizenship is granted. You’ve still got nearly a million people who, while children of illegals, are themselves citizens.

Remember, too, that the vast majority of european immigrants to the US were also ‘illegal’. Where do you think the term “WOP” comes from? The difference between the 1800s and now is that back then we didn’t have huge social programs, so immigration was a net benefit for the economy. (Of course, back then the people were complaining about the Irish and Italian who were ‘taking our jobs’).

Alternatively, you could stop complaining about ‘illegals’ and instead recognize that California has incredibly expensive social programs that are insufficiently funded. Even if you got rid of everyone in the state that is an illegal immigrant, you’re still not going to balance the budget.

Here’s where CA is currently spending money:

- Education: $53.8b (~40%, as required by prop 98, and yet below the national average per-capita)
- Health & Human Services: $38b (28.2%)
- Prisons: $9.8b (7.3%)
- Everything else (roads, courts, etc.): $34b (24.5%)

So, comparing with other states, the obvious standout is Health & Human Services, which would align with what most of the anti-immigration people seem to think is the problem with CA’s budget.

So lets dig a little deeper. Welfare and Medi-Cal account for $8 and $15bn, respectively.

If 100% of these funds went to illegals (they don’t), and we got rid of all the illegals (we can’t), we’d stil have a $10-20 bn deficit.

The most aggressive anti-immigration websites I can find estimate that around 40% of medi-cal and welfare go to illegals. The former is feasible, the latter is impossible since only citizens can get welfare benefits. They’re probably counting the legal guardians of citizens, who may be illegal but get paid on behalf of the children.

So…we could eliminate all the illegals and save a whopping $13-15bn a year. We’ll just ignore the huge costs coming from removing the illegals and keeping them out, the cost of addressing the legal property rights that illegal immigrants DO have. We’ve saved $15bn. Still a $20bn shortfall.

You’re also assuming that illegals pay nothing, which is simply absurd. Even if illegals paid 0 income taxes in aggregate (and they don’t), they’re still paying sales taxes and fees, which make up 30% of the state’s revenues (around $30bn). Given that estimates of the illegal population of CA are somewhere around 5-10%, we’re looking at losing at least $3bn in revenue.

So…could we please stop pretending that getting rid of illegal immigrants is going to solve California’s budget problem? We’re not spending $35bn a year on 3 million people!

Comment by L. Opine
2009-05-31 23:02:52

Thank you for the most impressively written rebuttal of the anti immigrant brigades I’ve read anywhere. Bravo.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Sailor
2009-06-01 02:19:18

I know that it is assumed that every child born in america is a US citizen that is not technically true.

The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents are entitled to birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment, although it has generally been assumed that they are. When accorded automatic birthright citizenship based on birth on American soil, a newborn’s status is generally unaffected by the legal status or citizenship of that individual’s mother or father.

I dought this issue will ever be officially clarified anytime in the near future.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Charles Ponzi
2009-06-01 20:26:50

Hey there Sailor,

I’m sorry, but how is the following debatable?

Amendment 14, section 1:

All persons born . . . in the United States, . . . are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

(Source: United States Constitution)

Yours,

Chuck

PS. You copied and pasted from wikipedia in your comment, without citing it. And you misspelled “doubt”.

 
 
Comment by Charles Ponzi
2009-06-01 20:32:14

Wow! For years I thought I was the only reader of this blog who wasn’t rabidly and moronically anti-immigrant. It’s good to know I’m not alone.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Kevin
2009-06-01 23:57:26

I hate to point out the obvious, but if you don’t interpret the 14th amendment as granting birthright citizenship, then there is technically NOTHING in the constitution that establishes citizenship, other than naturalization.

In other words, every single person in this country who is descended from immigrants who did not go through the naturalization process (which would be the vast majority of us) is an illegal immigrant. None of my ancestors that I’m aware of ever officially applied for naturalization (back then you just had to live here for 5 years and ask for it). Where would you like to send me back to?

Just because the SCOTUS has never ruled on whether children born to illegals are citizens does not make it ‘untrue’, nor does it make them ‘illegals’. We have a commonlaw court system, and until the day that the SCOTUS *does* make a ruling on such a case, the citizenship issue will remain the way that most rational people interpret it.

Of course, that day will never happen because it would suddenly make the majority of current US ‘citizens’ illegals.

So really, the only thing that you might see happen is another amendment that strictly defines citizenship as only being granted to children born to citizens and those who were naturalized (personally, I’d vote for only the latter…make *everyone* earn their citizenship, born here or not).

What would that change? Very little. Illegal immigrants would still come to the US. Illegal immigrants can still get naturalized later in life.

That *still* doesn’t change the cold, hard reality that CA’s problems have very little to do with immigration. Maybe you should direct your rage at the 50 year old citizen retirees who are getting $600k pensions or the completely broken taxation system that punishes workers in favor of wealth hoarders.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-30 19:00:40

The governor and legislature are proving themselves unfit to govern. They should all be recalled. The won’t cut at all areas that should be cut first and instead propose deep cuts in areas that should be cut last. It’s disgusting.

On top of targeted cuts designed to inflict the most pain, I expect they’ll try to raise taxes using a simple majority vote in violation of the state constitution requiring a 2/3 vote. They’ll try to do this by saying all of the new taxes don’t raise any more revenue than was raised before the recession/depression. But taxes will have been extended to new areas and existing taxes increased. Those still working could get absolutely soaked. Even after voters sent them a resounding message at the polls, they still don’t get it. I hope they prove me wrong.

Comment by lagunalover
2009-05-30 20:40:46

California has a 9.3% state income tax rate kicking in at $47,000/yr. It shouldn’t have any revenue problem. Spending is the problem. It needs deep cuts across the board, sparing no one.

Comment by robin
2009-05-31 01:36:25

Cut state workers’ wages by 25% and their retirement benefits by 50%. For starters.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by CA renter
2009-05-31 04:17:44

Get rid of the illegal immigrants first, then ask us to give up wages, benefits and services and/or raise taxes.

Nobody is addressing the problem!

 
Comment by Molly
2009-05-31 09:25:04

“Get rid of the illegal immigrants first, then ask us to give up wages, benefits and services and/or raise taxes.”

Agreed. Arnie wants to balance the budget on the state workers’ backs. Yes, they’ll probably have to take a cut. But NOBODY should have their wages cut until entitlements for illegals are completely eliminated.

 
 
 
 
Comment by Matt_in_TX
2009-05-31 07:34:32

Bwahaha. So the CA government IS a reflection of the people.

Won’t reduce spending. Won’t increase tax revenue. Won’t lay off. Will steal directly from taxpayers (err, their state tax refunds that is).

Or possibly those who benefitted from the spending would have lost either way…

 
 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 13:43:40

“And more foreclosures could be poised to enter the pipeline, according to a report by First American CoreLogic. It showed that in one of Lake Elsinore’s ZIP codes, 92532, 3 out of every 4 mortgages were ‘under water.’”

Yegads — sounds like there may soon be more foreclosure homes available for sale than investors can shake a stick at…

 
Comment by Professor Bear
2009-05-30 14:01:27

“It seems that real-estate busts don’t phase Doug Duncan. Fannie Mae’s vice president and chief economist spoke at the Real Estate Research Council of Southern California’s quarterly luncheon on Thursday at Cal Poly Pomona, giving a humorous yet serious view of the local and national housing markets.”

“‘There’s a presumption today that this is all new, but it’s not,’ Duncan said about the reeling housing market coupled with a battered economy. ‘This has happened cyclically time and time again.’”

From MBA to Fannie Mae for Doug, eh?

My question: Is he still renting these days?

Comment by Ben Jones
2009-05-30 14:14:07

I was hoping someone would bring that up. If a reporter in the audience had known that Duncan sold his house and began renting near the top, maybe the next logical question would have been, ‘what does the ratio of rents to mortgage payments mean, and what does that tell us about current prices and their inevitable direction?’

 
 
Comment by 2banana
2009-05-30 14:25:38

“Resident Jeff Nelson, 27, a firefighter, said he and his wife, a teacher, would like to move their growing family into one of many low priced single family homes now on the market, but they’re stuck in this complex, he said. The numbers just don’t add up: They bought their unit three years ago for $527,000, they owe $500,000 and his foreclosed neighbors are selling their places for less than $450,000.”

Well, it only seems fair. Public unions in CA (like firefighters and teachers) have bankrupted CA, so being bankrupted by condo you could not afford and paying nothing off in three years (not even a 5% downpayment) seems pretty fair…

And just wait until your outrageous benefits, pensions and salaried are slashed so that CA can once again have a balanced budget.

Comment by Groundhogday
2009-05-30 15:20:23

A firefighter and a teacher buy a $500k house. Enough said.

Comment by Matt_in_TX
2009-05-31 12:48:27

Err, 500k condo.

“Half Million” and “Condo” in the same sentence, better be followed by a phrase describing walking distance to something interesting in New York City. No wait, that’s several million.

 
 
 
Comment by 2banana
2009-05-30 14:35:45

“Resident Jeff Nelson, 27, a firefighter, said he and his wife, a teacher, would like to move their growing family into one of many low priced single family homes now on the market, but they’re stuck in this complex, he said. The numbers just don’t add up: They bought their unit three years ago for $527,000, they owe $500,000 and his foreclosed neighbors are selling their places for less than $450,000.”

Well, it only seems fair. Public unions in CA (like firefighters and teachers) have bankrupted CA, so being bankrupted by condo you could not afford and paying nothing off in three years (with less than a 5% downpayment) seems pretty fair…

And just wait until your outrageous benefits, pensions and salaried are slashed so that CA can once again have a balanced budget

Comment by Anthony
2009-05-30 15:55:02

Cal-Fire firefighters, police, and nurses in California all make far more than the national prevailing wage. A series of increases in the 1990’s pushed through by their respective unions led to a more than doubling of salaries/benefits/pension. These obligations are crushing the state. But in a liberal place like this, people believe that these professions are entitled to an unlimited amount of money. In fact, their unions are now challenging bankruptcy proceedings by cities so that they are exempt from restructuring of these benefits/pensions, as was the example set by Vallejo.

Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-30 19:13:51

“But in a liberal place like this, people believe that these professions are entitled to an unlimited amount of money.”

Maybe not judging by the recent election results. The omnipresent ad with the firefighter with the phony smudge on his forehead didn’t appear to sway many voters. Most of my Democratic-leaning coworkers voted no on props 1a-e. One shouldn’t have to take a vow of poverty to work in the public sector, but retiring after 30 years with 90 percent of your working salary isn’t sustainable.

Comment by Bill in Los Angeles
2009-05-30 19:30:02

The police/Corrections officers/prosecuting attorneys/grand juries/judges side are more often than not the darling children of the right wing.

Eventually, the illegality of victimless crimes, the cost of incarcerating prostitutes, johns, dope smokers, let alone the cost of making them felons and second class citizens (they turn to hard real crime to survive) will bankrupt governments in all states.

The revolution will probably occur before the bankruptcy - other social engineering programs by the beloved government will bankrupt the government before the victimless crimes.

What a society we’ve become. In the 1800s cocaine was legal. Every town had brothels, they were legal.

What the “s”hell happened? We decided we will manufacture crimes, even though no victims, to create a new welfare class of more cops/correction officers, prosecuting attorneys, and what not.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-30 21:37:29

Bill in Los Angeles,

Good points. I feel so much safer since we’ve incarcerated a whole class of people for what should otherwise be legal activities among consenting adults. I was astounded, though not surprised, to learn there are more than 5000 prison guards in California making more than $100k per year in just wages and overtime. We imprison far too many people and spend far too much per year to house them. There are so many places to cut that would have little negative impact and some that would arguably have a positive impact. Instead, our “leaders” start with areas which should mostly be cut least and last. Pathetic.

 
Comment by LA-Architect
2009-05-31 22:01:28

It’s cheaper to educate a child as opposed to incarcerate them. However, then the Prison Lobbyists wouldn’t be rolling in so much dough!!!

 
 
Comment by lagunalover
2009-05-30 20:43:34

I read that election had only a 23% voter turnout. Does anyone even care in California?

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-30 21:39:54

One could argue that those that still care and are paying attention were those that voted, not necessarily a bad thing in the short term. In the long term, more people need to care, pay attention, and be involved.

 
Comment by B. Durbin
2009-05-31 18:49:26

I care, and I usually vote… but I totally blanked. Too much else going on, I guess.

 
Comment by pismoclam
2009-05-31 18:58:57

Good. That means that my family vote (6) counts for more. Too bad it didn’t work in the general election when the marxist was elected.

 
 
 
 
 
Comment by Ben Jones
2009-05-30 14:42:11

‘Bill Velto, a broker/manager for Tarbell Realtors in Upland…‘We’re getting 10 to 15 offers on every property,’ he said. ‘I think the banks are being wise by not dumping a lot of these on the market because that would hurt them by driving down prices on other properties.’

‘In a new townhouse complex just a few miles from Intel Corp.’s Santa Clara headquarters, close to 10 percent of the units are on the market as foreclosure sales. But wander down the dreamy streets — Inspiration Place, Meditation Place, Fascination Place — and you would never know. ‘They don’t hang out signs because they want to be discreet,’ says Robert Lei, who…works as a specialist in foreclosure sales. ‘They don’t want so many people to see so many ‘for sale’ signs and get scared away, like there’s something wrong here.’

Well, Mr Velto (who carried some of the biggest pom poms during the boom), I have no doubts that the banks are using their ability to hide the massive inventory of REOs to their advantage. But the larger question is, are we seeing collusion that is to the disadvantage of the consumer? And why isn’t DC looking into such a strategy? What if this sort of thing was being done in any other industry?

There is something wrong here, IMO.

Comment by aNYCdj
2009-05-30 15:21:27

Sure Bill 10 bids at 20-24-30-35 38 39 40 42 45 and 62% off your asking price

——————-
‘Bill Velto, a broker/manager for Tarbell Realtors in Upland…‘We’re getting 10 to 15 offers on every property,’

 
Comment by Groundhogday
2009-05-30 15:22:22

But is this really to their advantage? Temporarily, in the short term perhaps…. but long term these houses will eventually all end up on the market and eventually depress prices. Given the carry costs, it is hard to see how the banks come out ahead.

Comment by oxide
2009-05-30 16:13:15

If you wait long enough and lobby hard enough, maybe you can convince Fannie to buy more mortgages. Then you whip out your hidden inventory and *poof* lotsa profit! On the other hand, if TTTimmy and the Messiah put their little feet down and say enough is enough, then you’re stuck with housing that’s falling apart.

It’s a giant game of chicken.

 
Comment by SDGreg
2009-05-30 19:21:45

“Given the carry costs, it is hard to see how the banks come out ahead.”

Unless the intent is for the lenders to take a smaller loss now and for those buying now to take the rest of the loss. Those holding the old loans take less of a loss. The new buyers and those providing new loans take the rest of the loss.

Comment by rms
2009-05-30 20:16:29

The investors who bought shares in 2nd mortgages (the financed down payment) lost it all in one fell swoop. No tears for them!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by CA renter
2009-05-31 04:22:31

Those holding the old loans take less of a loss. The new buyers and those providing new loans take the rest of the loss.
———————

IMHO, this is exactly the plan. And we all know who is providing the new loans…us (taxpayers)!!!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by Awaiting Bubble Rubble
2009-05-31 19:55:09

I’ve been doing some research on buying foreclosures through a local housing authority’s neighborhood stablization program participation. The first lists provided by a local lender (a recently renamed onetime largest lender in the country run by the big oompa loompa) showed days in inventory and days on the market. The days in inventory were typically 200 or so, while days on the market were often less than 30. When I inquired about this discrepancy the lender told me it takes several months to vacate the properties and bring them to market. However, the typical discrepancy was closer to 6-8 months. Then the lender deleted the “days in inventory” column from the listings they send out weekly.

There are also media reports of foreclosures being withheld from the market. See for example, http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1723193,00.html or http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/05/03/MN1117BSR8.DTL

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 
Comment by Sailor
2009-06-01 02:31:44

Sure the oil industry does it all the time. From Opec cutting oil production to all the oil companies in America shutting down gasoline production in the spring for scheduled maintenance, right before peak driving season.

 
 
Comment by Lisa
2009-05-30 15:36:26

“Well, Mr Velto (who carried some of the biggest pom poms during the boom), I have no doubts that the banks are using their ability to hide the massive inventory of REOs to their advantage. But the larger question is, are we seeing collusion that is to the disadvantage of the consumer?”

One of the folks at my barn (Bay Area) works for B of A…said most of their work these days is sorting out the Countrywide mess of a portfolio….that most of the mortgages are failing and don’t qualify for re-financing…and that as bad as 2009 is, 2010 is the tsunami, as 5-Year adjustable loans were very popular here during the peak bubble years. Everything we bounce back and forth on this blog was confirmed by someone who works in the trenches and sees this everyday.

Comment by CA renter
2009-05-31 04:23:57

Thanks for the info, Lisa!

 
Comment by GotRocks
2009-05-31 14:38:29

But I thought Countrywide fit into their strategic planning…but them on the ground, don’t you know, in the neighborhoods.

Snark.

 
Comment by Awaiting Bubble Rubble
2009-05-31 19:57:37

“Everything we bounce back and forth on this blog was confirmed by someone who works in the trenches and sees this everyday.”

I worked at Countrywide in 2002-2005. I couldn’t believe what I saw. It’s much worse than what I’ve seen regularly posted on this blog.

 
 
Comment by BottomFisher
2009-05-30 17:20:24

“Severe losses led Burbank resident Calvin Jung to the event. Jung was forced to close his chiropractic and massage center in downtown Los Angeles after business had slowed to a halt during the recession. He lost close to $90,000 over two years, he said.”

He also said it’s been a ‘real pain in the neck’…..but fortunately he could do an adjustment to his own neck and stopped the pain.

 
Comment by matthew
2009-05-30 17:43:45

This story is getting sliced and diced every day in the media and they still havn’t got it figured out. Housing will continue to correct until it reaches historic norms in terms of prevailing wages and rents.. we’d be a lot closer to that balance were it not for all the shenanigans in Washington and the Fed to try and re-inflate this thing. I don’t see it happening.

I’ll me sniffing around the market in 2011 or so.. till then, let it fry…

 
Comment by Maxwell
2009-05-31 08:08:14

Who’s kidding who?
California house prices are still too high, they need to be knocked down at least another 30-40%. With the sour economy and high unemployment, no one is buying anything. Also if they could, they will put their monies elsewhere…like relocating out of state.
California is not getting better, it’s getting worse and our lawmakers could care less about us. The tax base is drying up with people leaving the state for a more business-friendly and lower taxes and jobs. California is no place to raise a family , it’s too dangerous and unsafe for children. The whole state is fast turning ghetto and all our governor wants to do is tax, tax and tax….but gov, we have not more money ?? I’m done with CA, and it’s my birthplace…. I’m gone !

Comment by B. Durbin
2009-05-31 18:54:47

“The tax base is drying up with people leaving the state for a more business-friendly and lower taxes and jobs.”

This is where the Lege falls flat. Instead of looking to raise taxes to balance the budget, they should be researching why businesses are leaving… and then reverse the practices that send businesses out of state.

Production facilities are moving to places like Tennessee and Texas.

Call centers outsource to various places both inter- and intra national.

Television is often filmed in Toronto.

See the trend? Cali businesses leave and no longer provide taxes to the state. Usually “cost of compliance” and “cost of living” are two major reasons cited for moving facilities.

Save California. Bring back business. Or just accept that the beautiful weather (heh) isn’t enough to justify a high tax burden and regulations that strangle businesses small and large.

 
 
Comment by martin
2009-05-31 08:14:18

“”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”Coyle noted a recent study found that building and selling a new home generates as much as $16,000 in revenues to the state. If you’re handing out a $10,000 tax credit and getting back $16,000, that’s a pretty good deal, he said. “”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"

What an idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Lets see, if the state gives nothing and builders still sell 5 houses the state earns 5X16,000 = 80,000 in tax revenue AND YOU DON’T WARP THE HOUSING MARKET.

Now, lets figure it giving in to the builders. Lets say they sell twice as many because of the credit 10X16,000= 160,000 MINUS the incentive 10X10,000= 100,000. The net take for the state would be 60,000. The state would lose 20K.

Now, I don’t think the incentive would double sales, especially if no end of the program is in site, it only steals future demand.

In one scenario the state warps the housing market and costs the taxpayer money and in the other the housing market is left to the market and the state saves money.

The builders are so full of it.

 
Comment by CABubblin
2009-06-01 17:04:56

“Coyle noted a recent study found that building and selling a new home generates as much as $16,000 in revenues to the state. If you’re handing out a $10,000 tax credit and getting back $16,000, that’s a pretty good deal, he said.”

ONLY if the tax credit drives a >267% increase in new home sales!!! If it only increase sales by 22% that’s a big loss for the state!

 
Comment by jeff saturday
2009-06-05 19:16:25

rr

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post